If I recall correctly, Ubuntu removed the searches going to Amazon by default. I'm guessing they will also remove this motd crap too. That said, the search crap resulted in me refusing to use their products and attempting to steer people away from Ubuntu. Just like I attempt to steer people away from MS.
Canonical forgot the golden rules about trust. People will give you an initial level of trust, but that same trust can be instantly lost. Once it's gone, it's extremely difficult to regain.
If you didn't mean it as a joke, you are a disgusting sexist pig! Why are you demanding women do everything a man does even when Biology prevents such?
Study Biology, recorded history, and recorded actual human behavior instead of believing fairy tales your gender study professor passes off as "education". Men have defended women since the beginning of recorded history because "biology". Men have gone to war while women stayed away from the battlefield because "biology". Women have raised children since the beginning of time, because "biology". Males produce testosterone which results in more muscle mass and stronger muscles. The other has a womb and mammary glands so that children can live (you do realized that children don't have teeth and need to feed right I hope). The lack of testosterone means among other things, they are not quite as strong as a male even when taking artificial testosterone.
Feminism has had some actual benefits for women in the past, but what we have today is a bunch of people creating fairy tales to create a victim culture and create animosity among the lower IQ who believe those fairy tales. Discrimination is illegal, end of statement. Women today have _more_ rights than men, not less (men are forced into the draft, and forced into combat. Women are not forced to do either). Both genders use their appearance and sex in both positive and negative ways and have done so since the beginning of time. Denying facts makes you a zealot, not smart. "Feminism" just happens to be your religion.
A base 12 system is more complex than a base 10 system. Fahrenheit and Kelvin both have historical and scientific reasons for maintenance. So what you are really asking is that we dumb it down for you.
I believe you meant something other than insulting people, but don't quite get that one either.
Look, I could get confusion if we were below a threshold, say -10 to 35, but if the number is high enough it becomes obvious that the measurement is in Fahrenheit. Even with those numbers, it's pretty obvious that if Arizona is 36 during the day in July.. it's frigging Celsius!
Here I came to see if anyone had cracked any good jokes about Iran and Hell, yet find idiotic statements like yours modded insightful.. *sigh*
Seems like society has a whole has decided that the burden of having disabled people unable to use public transport is greater than the relatively small burden to taxi companies to provide a few accessible vehicles.
Well there is a mighty big flaw in your logic isn't there? Uber is not a tax payer funded public transportation system. Nor it it a Taxi service bound by the same regulations. Uber and Lyft are both free market responses to an overtly corrupt system. Good for them!
Have any doubts, go try to start a cab company. If you don't like that idea, go find out how many payouts you need to make to get a medallion for any of those same corrupted Taxi companies in NYC, LA, etc...
Taxi services are not required to provide wheel chair accessibility in their cars, nor are limousine services. It is an unnecessary regulatory burden on those services to create such a regulation. This is yet another example of shit lawyers attempting to steal money. California has some very despicable lawyers who make their living by putting people out of business with bogus ADA lawsuits. http://www.adaabuse.com/
As TFA states these are arbitrary policies that change all the time. People started complaining about the open discrimination and hatred for white males, and Facebook could not say "nuh uh" with the prevalence of posts doing exactly that. So for a while (read: until the coast is clear) they will address those issues.
Pretty much how all authoritarian systems work, and history is chalk full of examples. Some are quite famous, but of course "it couldn't happen to me..".
That was never in dispute. You claimed that the Constitution doesn't protect non-citizens.
Which is true, by the simple fact that the US does not have any authority over non-citizens.
One could rightly state that "part" of the Declaration of Independence is a universal proclamation for all peoples (all people are created equal with natural rights) the remainder of that document is key. It is up to the people to reorganize or disband a government which denies people their Natural Rights. The founders did that for the citizens of the USA, but it is simply impossible for that same action to cover the globe.
I can't comment on the Anti-Federalist Papers (I bought a book on them and never got around to reading it).
Remember that bit I said about common sense? Not only did you just flat out lie, but you seem to lack common sense.
You're psychologically projecting.
You didn't read the work by your own admission, yet claim to have common sense on the subject. How much can a 7th grader who has barely studied algebra teach us about differential equations? Yeah, that is a problem with your logic.
How much daily time do the Indian and Chinese people working in factories 16 hours a day get to use Facebook exactly? How about all of those out tilling fields and gathering sticks and manure so that they can be warm at night? How many of those in Africa with Electricity log in to Facebook when their sustenance requires constant action,.
I'd put the actual number of active individual users at 1/2 a Billion across the globe. Active daily? Much much less!
And why would you do that when FB can obviously count its daily log ins quite accurately?
Facebook is counting "accounts", not "individual people". It's basic marketing and sales for them, not honesty and integrity for us.
You must have failed at basic rhetoric and basic marketing...
There are 7 Billion (roughly) people in the world, and the majority don't have Internet, phones, or power. If you are in doubt, look at the populations of India and China. The majority do not live in cities, but the sticks.
People who "facebook" have numerous accounts. Facebook in fact requires separate accounts for businesses. People had different accounts for work, different accounts for politics, different accounts for family/friends, and there are massive amounts of bot accounts which you can rent for cash.
I do not have a FB account that's active and admit I'm a rarity. Most people in the US do. I'd put the actual number of active individual users at 1/2 a Billion across the globe. Active daily? Much much less!
Since the US can not prosecute people in a foreign land and can not protect people in a foreign land. Your claim about universal law fails basic scrutiny. Your description of the Federalist papers is absolutely false. They are primarily letters between the founders regarding wording and concepts. The anti-Federalist papers are the same, and not really anti-Federalism but more concerned with the amount of power the Federal Government was given.
Remember that bit I said about common sense? Not only did you just flat out lie, but you seem to lack common sense.
FALSE! You are reading it wrong, if you read it at all. I demonstrated where that could not possibly be true with the 1st, 2nd, and 4th amendment. The 3rd can not apply to a non-citizen, nor can the 3rd, 5th, 6th. At least one party must be a Citizen for any of the 7th or 8th to apply, and the 9th and 10th are for States who are subject to the US Federal system.
In more simple terms, you are doing what we call "talking out your ass", because you are simply making a false claim.
You are correct that the founders knew the word citizen, but also assuming that everyone around them was a moron would could not determine anything without the word. There is this thing called "common sense", which you have to apply to all writings. When in doubt, refer to the Federalist papers.
US Constitutional Rights do not apply to people who are not citizens of the US. The US guarantees Free Speech to it's citizens. We can not provide the same protection to people in any other country. We can not guarantee a right to bear arms for people in Australia, and we can not guarantee a right to be secure in your person in Iran.
It is up to those people living under oppressive systems to overthrow their Governments and establish a Constitutional Republic like our founders did 220 years ago (give or take) if they so choose. Many people are content to live under tyranny, or create their own when they gain power.
I hear people say things like "they got their face smashed in" which is not literally true. We call this exaggeration, and in politics it's called hyperbole.
If you want to go back to Obama's campaign rhetoric, I can find just as many claims he made using the same type of hyperbole. Bush did the same, as did Clinton, Bush, and even the great Reagan.
If you want to make a claim that Trump's administration can't craft laws because he used hyperbole, then start back cancelling every damn law on the books. You can start with the ACA.
Or perhaps, read the actual proposals and EOs which are detailed and not simple campaign rhetoric and demand that Judges and Justices rule on what people do as opposed to what they said prior to drafting legislation.
ps. ACA still should be put in the dumpster immediately, but not because of the political hyperbole surrounding it's pre-Law days.
Simple. because the Public sector works off of my dime, not the free market. See Milton Friedman for arguments, who did a remarkable job expressing concerns over exactly the problems that unionized government jobs have caused.
Sorry, but I'm not going to attempt to summarize Friedman in a Slashdot post.
Absolutely false claim that the Freedom of Speech is to protect against Governments! You simply have no clue what you are talking about! Read Locke, who predates the US Constitution which embodied Free Speech. How about Luther who predated Locke by about a century. Read Plato who predated Luther by a couple thousand years. The point of Free Speech is to be able to express ideas and thoughts that people may dislike.
Government is a single aspect, but any power structure can and does limit speech to maintain and extend power. Be it the Catholic Church of old, Islamic Religion today, or any Government that ever existed. In fact, Universities were also notorious for demonizing people who had different ideas. You may in fact remember something in history regarding that exact topic. Universities today (yes, right now) demonize speech on Political views that don't match the Administration's. Not to be outdone by the Politicians, they also demonize science in areas that they can relate to politics, like Biology and Climate.
Free Speech is UNIVERSAL! As should be accountability for your words.
The US had two choices for President. One of those with the D in front of their name was propped up by a corrupt Democratic party, and media outlets like the biased gossip rag sourced in TFA. WaPo, as with NYT, NBC, CNN, and countless other media outlets (sorry, I refuse to call them "news" since they aren't) stated flat out that they were going to "destroy Trump". That campaign started right after he was announced as the R candidate. Now source all of the "leaks", media coverage, and talking points of the DNC and it becomes clear that those same media outlets are simply a mouthpiece for the entrenched elitists in the D party.
The candidate that the D party put up was a corrupt politician, and we have known about their corruption since the 90s (if not sooner). Unless you want to say that she was a puppet for Russia since then, any claim of Russian meddling in her loss fails basic scrutiny.
That said, the R party has some similar problems with entrenched and questionable office holders. Trumps biggest selling points are A) he's not a well known connected (re. corrupted) politician. B) he talked about some well known problems and said he would fix them. One of which is exactly political corruption. (so did Obama, Bush, Clinton, Bush, but they _were_ politicians and demonstrated dishonesty).
Enough people in enough areas voted Trump for him to win. Look at the map for pity sake! I have yet to see anything that demonstrates Trump as a bad President, I hear hyperbole and fabricated narratives by the same corrupt media I mentioned at the start. I see biased opinion polls about his approval ratings, which amazingly seem to match the "Hillary is gonna win" polls which showed how great she was and how bad he was.
Long story short, I don't believe the majority of media any longer. WaPo has less credibility than CNN who has less credibility than the Pravda at this point.
Show me a single case of country where there is not a two class (have and have-nots) and I'll consider your position somewhat rational. As stated, I consider you bat-shit insane. Sweden has a 2 class system, as does Russia, China, India, Venezuela, Cuba, Finland, Germany, France, England, Morocco, Syria, Saudi Arabia, and every other damn country in the world that you can name. So where is the difference?
Capitalism is the _ONLY_ system which allows mobility if Capitalist principles are actually followed. In fact, from the inception of the country until today it still works better than any other system. The US has trended downward in income equality and economic mobility because of the adoption of authoritarian socialism, not because of Capitalism.
Read Smith's description of the Capitalist system, or read Friedman's. Friedman was actually of the belief that Government could create Utopia until he saw how his own position was obliterated in several countries in South America where the policies he helped design as a young man were implemented.
Your ignorance is a problem you should consider addressing. Before you say something foolish, if you demand a billionaire give a few bucks to the whole populace you have not addressed economic mobility or income equality. You penalized the billionaire and gave a few peanuts to the masses to shut them up for a while.
Correct, and thanks for asking. My position however is not quite so simple. I'm also opposed to monopolization and for unionization (except for Government employees). I am also opposed to collusion to suppress wages by conglomerations with the intent of bypassing anti monopolization laws.
There are at least dozens other factors which play into my position opposing minimum wage. I can recommend some reading, but based on the remainder of your statement you are in blissful ignorance believing that there are only 2 possible positions to have. Slavery or Minimum wage. I make considerably more than minimum wage precisely because that belief is wrong.
Microsoft code was the entry point, but if the NSA was actually performing it's function and protecting the citizens of the US they would have notified Microsoft of the problem and perhaps even helped with a fix. The chain would have ended then and there.
Not notifying the vendor of the most widely used OS in the USA, the NSA acted against the interests of US Citizens.
Further, claiming that the Shadow Brokers are Russian fails basic scrutiny. If there was such a group working for the FSB they would have absolutely zero interest in releasing the exploit to the wild for anyone else to access.
Slashdot Mirror
Reading is not your strong suit. In fact a 3rd grader could whip you!
If I recall correctly, Ubuntu removed the searches going to Amazon by default. I'm guessing they will also remove this motd crap too. That said, the search crap resulted in me refusing to use their products and attempting to steer people away from Ubuntu. Just like I attempt to steer people away from MS.
Canonical forgot the golden rules about trust. People will give you an initial level of trust, but that same trust can be instantly lost. Once it's gone, it's extremely difficult to regain.
Thanks, I needed a good laugh.
If you didn't mean it as a joke, you are a disgusting sexist pig! Why are you demanding women do everything a man does even when Biology prevents such?
Study Biology, recorded history, and recorded actual human behavior instead of believing fairy tales your gender study professor passes off as "education". Men have defended women since the beginning of recorded history because "biology". Men have gone to war while women stayed away from the battlefield because "biology". Women have raised children since the beginning of time, because "biology". Males produce testosterone which results in more muscle mass and stronger muscles. The other has a womb and mammary glands so that children can live (you do realized that children don't have teeth and need to feed right I hope). The lack of testosterone means among other things, they are not quite as strong as a male even when taking artificial testosterone.
Feminism has had some actual benefits for women in the past, but what we have today is a bunch of people creating fairy tales to create a victim culture and create animosity among the lower IQ who believe those fairy tales. Discrimination is illegal, end of statement. Women today have _more_ rights than men, not less (men are forced into the draft, and forced into combat. Women are not forced to do either). Both genders use their appearance and sex in both positive and negative ways and have done so since the beginning of time. Denying facts makes you a zealot, not smart. "Feminism" just happens to be your religion.
A base 12 system is more complex than a base 10 system. Fahrenheit and Kelvin both have historical and scientific reasons for maintenance. So what you are really asking is that we dumb it down for you.
I believe you meant something other than insulting people, but don't quite get that one either.
Look, I could get confusion if we were below a threshold, say -10 to 35, but if the number is high enough it becomes obvious that the measurement is in Fahrenheit. Even with those numbers, it's pretty obvious that if Arizona is 36 during the day in July.. it's frigging Celsius!
Here I came to see if anyone had cracked any good jokes about Iran and Hell, yet find idiotic statements like yours modded insightful.. *sigh*
Seems like society has a whole has decided that the burden of having disabled people unable to use public transport is greater than the relatively small burden to taxi companies to provide a few accessible vehicles.
Well there is a mighty big flaw in your logic isn't there? Uber is not a tax payer funded public transportation system. Nor it it a Taxi service bound by the same regulations. Uber and Lyft are both free market responses to an overtly corrupt system. Good for them!
Have any doubts, go try to start a cab company. If you don't like that idea, go find out how many payouts you need to make to get a medallion for any of those same corrupted Taxi companies in NYC, LA, etc...
Taxi services are not required to provide wheel chair accessibility in their cars, nor are limousine services. It is an unnecessary regulatory burden on those services to create such a regulation. This is yet another example of shit lawyers attempting to steal money. California has some very despicable lawyers who make their living by putting people out of business with bogus ADA lawsuits. http://www.adaabuse.com/
As TFA states these are arbitrary policies that change all the time. People started complaining about the open discrimination and hatred for white males, and Facebook could not say "nuh uh" with the prevalence of posts doing exactly that. So for a while (read: until the coast is clear) they will address those issues.
Pretty much how all authoritarian systems work, and history is chalk full of examples. Some are quite famous, but of course "it couldn't happen to me..".
Your first assumption is correct, and confirmed by your own knowledge of the person I suggested you read :)
That was never in dispute. You claimed that the Constitution doesn't protect non-citizens.
Which is true, by the simple fact that the US does not have any authority over non-citizens.
One could rightly state that "part" of the Declaration of Independence is a universal proclamation for all peoples (all people are created equal with natural rights) the remainder of that document is key. It is up to the people to reorganize or disband a government which denies people their Natural Rights. The founders did that for the citizens of the USA, but it is simply impossible for that same action to cover the globe.
I can't comment on the Anti-Federalist Papers (I bought a book on them and never got around to reading it).
Remember that bit I said about common sense? Not only did you just flat out lie, but you seem to lack common sense.
You're psychologically projecting.
You didn't read the work by your own admission, yet claim to have common sense on the subject. How much can a 7th grader who has barely studied algebra teach us about differential equations? Yeah, that is a problem with your logic.
How much daily time do the Indian and Chinese people working in factories 16 hours a day get to use Facebook exactly? How about all of those out tilling fields and gathering sticks and manure so that they can be warm at night? How many of those in Africa with Electricity log in to Facebook when their sustenance requires constant action,.
I'd put the actual number of active individual users at 1/2 a Billion across the globe. Active daily? Much much less! And why would you do that when FB can obviously count its daily log ins quite accurately?
Facebook is counting "accounts", not "individual people". It's basic marketing and sales for them, not honesty and integrity for us.
You must have failed at basic rhetoric and basic marketing...
There are 7 Billion (roughly) people in the world, and the majority don't have Internet, phones, or power. If you are in doubt, look at the populations of India and China. The majority do not live in cities, but the sticks.
People who "facebook" have numerous accounts. Facebook in fact requires separate accounts for businesses. People had different accounts for work, different accounts for politics, different accounts for family/friends, and there are massive amounts of bot accounts which you can rent for cash.
I do not have a FB account that's active and admit I'm a rarity. Most people in the US do. I'd put the actual number of active individual users at 1/2 a Billion across the globe. Active daily? Much much less!
Since the US can not prosecute people in a foreign land and can not protect people in a foreign land. Your claim about universal law fails basic scrutiny. Your description of the Federalist papers is absolutely false. They are primarily letters between the founders regarding wording and concepts. The anti-Federalist papers are the same, and not really anti-Federalism but more concerned with the amount of power the Federal Government was given.
Remember that bit I said about common sense? Not only did you just flat out lie, but you seem to lack common sense.
Most US Constitutional rights apply to everyone.
FALSE! You are reading it wrong, if you read it at all. I demonstrated where that could not possibly be true with the 1st, 2nd, and 4th amendment. The 3rd can not apply to a non-citizen, nor can the 3rd, 5th, 6th. At least one party must be a Citizen for any of the 7th or 8th to apply, and the 9th and 10th are for States who are subject to the US Federal system.
In more simple terms, you are doing what we call "talking out your ass", because you are simply making a false claim.
You are correct that the founders knew the word citizen, but also assuming that everyone around them was a moron would could not determine anything without the word. There is this thing called "common sense", which you have to apply to all writings. When in doubt, refer to the Federalist papers.
US Constitutional Rights do not apply to people who are not citizens of the US. The US guarantees Free Speech to it's citizens. We can not provide the same protection to people in any other country. We can not guarantee a right to bear arms for people in Australia, and we can not guarantee a right to be secure in your person in Iran.
It is up to those people living under oppressive systems to overthrow their Governments and establish a Constitutional Republic like our founders did 220 years ago (give or take) if they so choose. Many people are content to live under tyranny, or create their own when they gain power.
I was answering that position, regardless of who owns it.
I hear people say things like "they got their face smashed in" which is not literally true. We call this exaggeration, and in politics it's called hyperbole.
If you want to go back to Obama's campaign rhetoric, I can find just as many claims he made using the same type of hyperbole. Bush did the same, as did Clinton, Bush, and even the great Reagan.
If you want to make a claim that Trump's administration can't craft laws because he used hyperbole, then start back cancelling every damn law on the books. You can start with the ACA.
Or perhaps, read the actual proposals and EOs which are detailed and not simple campaign rhetoric and demand that Judges and Justices rule on what people do as opposed to what they said prior to drafting legislation.
ps. ACA still should be put in the dumpster immediately, but not because of the political hyperbole surrounding it's pre-Law days.
Simple. because the Public sector works off of my dime, not the free market. See Milton Friedman for arguments, who did a remarkable job expressing concerns over exactly the problems that unionized government jobs have caused.
Sorry, but I'm not going to attempt to summarize Friedman in a Slashdot post.
Absolutely false claim that the Freedom of Speech is to protect against Governments! You simply have no clue what you are talking about! Read Locke, who predates the US Constitution which embodied Free Speech. How about Luther who predated Locke by about a century. Read Plato who predated Luther by a couple thousand years. The point of Free Speech is to be able to express ideas and thoughts that people may dislike.
Government is a single aspect, but any power structure can and does limit speech to maintain and extend power. Be it the Catholic Church of old, Islamic Religion today, or any Government that ever existed. In fact, Universities were also notorious for demonizing people who had different ideas. You may in fact remember something in history regarding that exact topic. Universities today (yes, right now) demonize speech on Political views that don't match the Administration's. Not to be outdone by the Politicians, they also demonize science in areas that they can relate to politics, like Biology and Climate.
Free Speech is UNIVERSAL! As should be accountability for your words.
The US had two choices for President. One of those with the D in front of their name was propped up by a corrupt Democratic party, and media outlets like the biased gossip rag sourced in TFA. WaPo, as with NYT, NBC, CNN, and countless other media outlets (sorry, I refuse to call them "news" since they aren't) stated flat out that they were going to "destroy Trump". That campaign started right after he was announced as the R candidate. Now source all of the "leaks", media coverage, and talking points of the DNC and it becomes clear that those same media outlets are simply a mouthpiece for the entrenched elitists in the D party.
The candidate that the D party put up was a corrupt politician, and we have known about their corruption since the 90s (if not sooner). Unless you want to say that she was a puppet for Russia since then, any claim of Russian meddling in her loss fails basic scrutiny.
That said, the R party has some similar problems with entrenched and questionable office holders. Trumps biggest selling points are A) he's not a well known connected (re. corrupted) politician. B) he talked about some well known problems and said he would fix them. One of which is exactly political corruption. (so did Obama, Bush, Clinton, Bush, but they _were_ politicians and demonstrated dishonesty).
Enough people in enough areas voted Trump for him to win. Look at the map for pity sake! I have yet to see anything that demonstrates Trump as a bad President, I hear hyperbole and fabricated narratives by the same corrupt media I mentioned at the start. I see biased opinion polls about his approval ratings, which amazingly seem to match the "Hillary is gonna win" polls which showed how great she was and how bad he was.
Long story short, I don't believe the majority of media any longer. WaPo has less credibility than CNN who has less credibility than the Pravda at this point.
Show me a single case of country where there is not a two class (have and have-nots) and I'll consider your position somewhat rational. As stated, I consider you bat-shit insane. Sweden has a 2 class system, as does Russia, China, India, Venezuela, Cuba, Finland, Germany, France, England, Morocco, Syria, Saudi Arabia, and every other damn country in the world that you can name. So where is the difference?
Capitalism is the _ONLY_ system which allows mobility if Capitalist principles are actually followed. In fact, from the inception of the country until today it still works better than any other system. The US has trended downward in income equality and economic mobility because of the adoption of authoritarian socialism, not because of Capitalism.
Read Smith's description of the Capitalist system, or read Friedman's. Friedman was actually of the belief that Government could create Utopia until he saw how his own position was obliterated in several countries in South America where the policies he helped design as a young man were implemented.
Your ignorance is a problem you should consider addressing. Before you say something foolish, if you demand a billionaire give a few bucks to the whole populace you have not addressed economic mobility or income equality. You penalized the billionaire and gave a few peanuts to the masses to shut them up for a while.
So then you're opposed to a minimum wage, right?
Correct, and thanks for asking. My position however is not quite so simple. I'm also opposed to monopolization and for unionization (except for Government employees). I am also opposed to collusion to suppress wages by conglomerations with the intent of bypassing anti monopolization laws.
There are at least dozens other factors which play into my position opposing minimum wage. I can recommend some reading, but based on the remainder of your statement you are in blissful ignorance believing that there are only 2 possible positions to have. Slavery or Minimum wage. I make considerably more than minimum wage precisely because that belief is wrong.
Ask the student how important it is to have minimum wage jobs be paid a "living" wage.
Yup, society at present is very F'd up. Nope, communism/socialism won't fix anything, in fact it does the opposite.
Microsoft code was the entry point, but if the NSA was actually performing it's function and protecting the citizens of the US they would have notified Microsoft of the problem and perhaps even helped with a fix. The chain would have ended then and there.
Not notifying the vendor of the most widely used OS in the USA, the NSA acted against the interests of US Citizens.
Further, claiming that the Shadow Brokers are Russian fails basic scrutiny. If there was such a group working for the FSB they would have absolutely zero interest in releasing the exploit to the wild for anyone else to access.